By Isaac Yetiv, Ph.D.
LA JOLLA, California — Gertrude Bell, the most famous British political writer about the Arab World in early 20th century, often wrote that “the Arabs cannot govern themselves.” If only she could see the American government now, one century later, in its splendid paralysis !
The alarming circus-like spectacle in Washington and the successive debacles in foreign policy are very depressing to the ordinary citizen and contribute to the cynicism and distrust of everything political. They also explain the low esteem we the people have for our own government.
Fearing tyranny and usurpation of power by one man or one group, the Founding Fathers created, by design not by error, a complicated system of government where the Executive and the two chambers of the Legislative are elected independently while depending on one another to “get things done.”
We have 535 practically independent legislators (435 in the House plus 100 in the Senate), and a president with the veto power, all of whom with their own political agendas.No wonder nothing goes. Both parties should, at least, agree to abide by the rules of the game which require the adoption of an annual budget — we are now four years without a budget, that is unheard of– and not have periodically a repeat performance of the shameful bickering and blaming each other for what became household words and phrases such as”continuing resolutions, shutting down the government, raising the debt ceiling, fiscal cliff, sequester etc.” A balanced budget, debated and adopted once a year, will put an end to this chaos and government dysfunction. Is that too much to ask? It is not partisan, and it is good for the country.
Obama’s refusal to negotiate with the elected representatives of the American people was ostensibly compensated by his enthusiasm to negotiate with its enemies. He negotiated with Bashar Assad whom he threatened to bomb a week before, and with his protector Vladimir Putin of KGB memory, and now with Assad’s masters and purveyors of money and weapons, and world sponsors of terrorism,the Iranian mullahs. In his speech at the United Nations, Obama praised the new ” president of the Islamic republic of Iran” for just saying that his country does not intend to produce a nuclear weapon.” Hasn’t Obama heard this same mantra repeated by all Iranian presidents? Nothing new to deserve special mention and gratitude. His government’s position, strengthened by international experts, is that all signs indicate the Iranian is lying, as did his predecessors.
Nuclear development for peaceful purposes does not require six huge nuclear facilities, ensconced very deep in the earth, protected by very thick concrete walls, and spinning at a speed much higher than needed for “peace,” and an ICBM program. And if it were for peace, it would not be boasted as the weapon that will “wipe Israel from the face of the earth.”
The display of crude naivete by the president and his acolytes is stunning; it is risible, if it were not so tragic. What the mullahs want is time…time to finish the job. They have been “negotiating” for 10 years. It is amazing how governments don’t learn from previous mistakes and continue to repeat them. In 1994, President Clinton signed with North Korea what was then called “the agreed framework agreement” which stipulated that N.Korea would shut down its nuclear installations in Byongyang and would be compensated with money–a few billion dollars–, and oil, and a new reactor for “peace.”
We know what happened: they took the goodies and forgot to shut down; then they tested and later produced a little atomic bomb.
Unlike the Americans, the Iranians learned the Korean lesson: If you want to be respected, and immune from foreign attacks–because of fear of retaliation– produce an atomic bomb. And sell nuclear installations to other miscreants: N.Korea sold one to Syria, identical to the Bongyang facility, which Israel quietly destroyed in 2007 over strong objections from the Bush administration. Otherwise, Obama would have faced a nuclear-armed Syria on top of the chemical one, which would have tempered his braggadocio, as empty as it was.
Not yet recovered from the humiliation inflicted upon him by Putin, Obama asked for a “handshake” with Rouhani, the Iranian new president , and was rebuffed publicly without even the diplomatic “plausible deniability.” Undeterred, he doubled down with a phone call that lasted all of 15 minutes, and boasted about it. He will send Kerry to Geneva to “negotiate” with an Iran recently strengthened by an important UN election as “rapporteur to the Commission on Disarmament and International Security” (if you can believe it), and already powerful as Chair of the non-aligned group of UN members, the largest bloc in the UN. You can be sure the Mullahs will use these two trump cards in their “negotiations” to intimidate the Obama administration, and gain more time.
So what’s wrong with talking? Nothing,except that it is futile, raises false hopes, and give cover to the shrewd Iranians who will extort some relief from the sanctions that have become unbearable.
It will also scare Iran’s potential victims, not only Israel but also the Sunni Muslim neighbors like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey who will claim ,and finally obtain, their bomb. And that is not good for anyone.
Why all this? I often ask myself, perplexed. And I always come back to the same answer: the ideology of the US president and his lack of leadership qualities. He believes–and he has amply written and spoken about it– that international problems can be solved by being nice, showing good will, trusting the words of the enemy, and “negotiating.” Exactly the antithesis of “real politik,” balance of power, the Hobbesian attitude espoused by the Founding Fathers that “Homo homini lupus est” (Man is wolf to man). That’s what guided him in dealing with Assad, Putin,and now Rouhani; and that’s what explains “the avalanche of scandals” that have plagued his administration.
What is worse is that, like ever-optimist Pangloss in Voltaire’s Candide, whose slogan is “All is for the best in the best of possible worlds,” our president is bereft of the capacity to feel disappointment and admit failures–a sine qua non for rectifying, changing, and correcting mistakes–. and he continues to harangue the crowds of his followers with that microphone, carried away with the exuberance of his own verbosity and braggadocio.instead of “leading” –even from behind–the negotiations with his American political opponents to solve the nation’s problems, as required and expected from any president.
No wonder the enemies of America do not fear or respect the US president, and its friends and allies do not trust him. This is evident in the Sunni Arab press, less so in the Israeli press for obvious reasons , especially from the government spokesmen who must hold their tongues. But the feeling of abandonment is pervasive. The “phony negotiations” with the Ayatollahs are tantamount to an American presidential veto on any Israeli military action, but what if the Israeli government reaches its own red line,i.e. “the capability of Iran to produce the bomb,” NOT its actual production ?
As a state, the best friend and ally of the US, Israel must avoid open confrontation with the US administration. It is incumbent upon the American Jewish organizations, and Israel’s friends in Congress and among the American people to engage actively in the struggle to prevent the nuclear weaponization of Iran which is not only essential for Israel’s survival but is also a very strong American national security interest.
*
Yetiv is a freelance writer and lecturer based in La Jolla, California. He may be contacted at isaac.yetiv@sdjewishworld.com